sdj64
-
Posts
716 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by sdj64
-
-
On 11/9/2018 at 3:23 PM, JacobJHC said:
Nope. The idea of the Jool 5 is for a single mission to do it. This can take the form of one large ship launched at one time, or as one large ship assembled in LKO.
On 11/9/2018 at 10:26 PM, PTGFlyer said:Fair point.
But it seems like assembling in LKO isn't functionally different from refueling. Couldn't you just launch a bunch of fuel tanks, transfer, light the engines, and immediately jettison them?
Generally, I have allowed anything in Kerbin SOI before you leave, provided you fly it yourself and don't just cheat-menu it into position. You could capture an asteroid, set up a mining outpost on Minmus, launch a huge fuel depot or tanker, or any other infrastructure of your choosing. I have accepted entries that used each of those things, usually they were done in an existing save with the stuff already there. You can't interact with any ships/stations beyond Kerbin's SOI though.
Jacob's decision is his to make though, this is just for perspective of how it was handled before.
Update on my own ship: I think I will probably have to add a couple of nukes for the transfer from Pol-Tylo and back. It's just not quite enough to make it as-is. Maybe I can switch some of the LF storage to LFO and eke out more vacuum performance, I did want to avoid having nukes on this ship.
-
8 hours ago, JacobJHC said:
The master returns. May I say that ship is very well detailed. I can't wait to see it in action. Will it be dropping a Tylo lander or going in itself?
It's going to be tight on delta V but the intent is to land all 125 on every moon! It has a VTOL system to land on its belly, since it's too big to tail-land and flop like Marschig's ships. It also carries a lander in one of the cargo bays, but it's intended for biome hopping for science and can't both land and return to orbit on Tylo.
-
This will be the 5th time I've attempted the Jool 5 Challenge
Today is the 5th anniversary of the Jool 5 challenge
And now, in KSP 1.5!
So naturally, 125 Kerbals are going to Jool.
Actually, 1.5 threw off my plan. I had planned this mission when KSP was in 1.4.5, where the 3rd "5" was, of course, the 5 moons of Jool. But when 1.5 dropped my first thought was "oh now I have to do 625" then "well this part count is spiraling out of control" then "better finish my 125 kerbal ship..."
-
On 10/8/2018 at 6:49 AM, Ziv said:
Hi, this is Ziv, originally I created the JOOL-5 back in 2013.
1. Flying separate ships to Jool: the basic challenge idea was to fly one mission to the Jool system and explore all the moons in one go, and go home safely.
This means the crew would travel together until Jool SOI. But you can undock all the landers at once when arriving, of course. You don't have to get into orbit for it. Jool's SOI is so huge that you can easily catch all the moons with the landers.
I'm just not sure if it is better than using Jool's gravity to slow down everything at once and then go for the moons (Oberth-effect). But it's up to you!
What I also wanted to avoid is unlimited support and fuel missions. I wanted to make Jool-5 a very hard and "clean" mission where you can succeed or fail. But soon I included the possibility for one refueling mission, thinking about those who spent a lot of time on their mission and they just lack a little fuel for success...
Also, please note that in 2013 the orange tanks and the mainsail were the largest ones, and the rockets exploded above 2-300 parts. So it was way more harder back then.2. The Kerbin-Jool interplanetary travel have to be in a pod/capsule: this is for making it more life-like. Sitting in a chair in a space suit for months is not good for the health of the Kerbals.
And also, this adds to the difficulty. But once in Jool's SOI, you can use seats for landers to the moons.
...and you can do the mission in any way you like. When I managed the challenge I had a "Mixed solutions (they just wanted to go on their way)" category for folks like you.
I was considering replying and you hit the nail on the head, exactly what I was thinking.
I would add, I got rid of the "mixed solutions" category only after there were no entries in that category for a whole game version. But there's certainly the case for it returning, if there is demand!
-
I'm a little late since I was on vacation last week, but it's been just over 6 months that @JacobJHC has been managing the Jool 5 Challenge! Great job so far!
And great job everyone who submitted an entry! It's great to see that even after almost 5 YEARS the Jool 5 keeps inspiring people to come back or try it for the first time.
-
3 hours ago, Matt Lowne said:
Incorrect, good sir.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-pctls27b0Okay fine... Dockable ore container left in low orbit.
-
I think what you are imagining is completely impossible. Nobody has even made an Eve SSTO with refueling that can operate entirely independently (i.e. make it to Gilly to refuel after Eve takeoff without using a dockable fuel container left in low Eve orbit).
You should probably ping @Kergarin too since he is the expert in Eve SSTOs. This video shows his Eve SSTO which uses a dockable fuel container. It was done in version 1.2.2 but I didn't see any atmosphere changes since then, looking through the version history.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIuSCWxPZm4
-
On 6/26/2018 at 1:07 PM, DAL59 said:
Any progress?
The ion stage didn't have enough TWR. I set no minimum for it, thinking it was fine for in-space maneuvers, but Mr. Oberth was not happy with my decision. I did create a new craft that has much lower drag and the proper ratio of LF to Ox, and even raised to 4 ions but I still don't think it will be enough. I got about 75% mass fraction to LKO but didn't really want to try the ion part again.
I revisited the spreadsheet and it looks impossible without ions.
-
On 6/22/2018 at 11:28 AM, Hummingbird Aerospace said:
I don’t wanna use rapiers because the NERVs will be doing most of the interplanetary travel and I only need an engine like the closed-cycle RAPIER mode for powering me through the upper atmosphere on a suborbital trajectory where airbreathing engines flame out and NERVs have a very low thrust and it would take too much time to circularize, so I don’t need four of them. I have heard rapiers are not very efficient, and doing the Jool-5, which I am doing with this ship, I need maximum efficiency.
Although I guess landing on Tylo would me much easier with 4 rapiers in closed-cycle...
Try 4 Rapiers and 2 NERVs, you'll probably find that the weight savings from eliminating two engines are more than worth the slight hit to ISP. If you really need the vacuum ISP for a Tylo landing, you can replace the Swivels with Darts, or a single Skiff, Poodle, or Wolfhound if your design allows it.
-
31 minutes ago, JacobJHC said:
Sure. Can't wait to see the video.
Also, in this time of need I would like to call on the knowledge and judgement of @sdj64. Does clipping a radial engine to make it a nonradial engine count as clipping? I am only clipping the attachment point so I would just imagine that they only put on the engine part instead of the whole thing. Personally I would say it's fine but since I am the judge I need someone to judge the judge.
I got that question once before with a Thud, and I think I said if half the body is visible it would be good. Though if I was judging your entry and I saw this in the album after you finished the challenge, I'd probably accept it since it's not that major.
-
1 minute ago, kerbalstar said:
Whoops, you're right, I'll fix that. Also, does anyone know how you do the pretty linking thing?
I think it auto-formats if you paste the URL into the editor. If you click the hyperlink button, it makes a blue underlined text link instead.
-
@kerbalstar The Jool 5 Challenge is currently maintained by @JacobJHC. You have the right thread linked though. Thanks for keeping the heritage challenges updated, it's a great list to have.
-
On 4/20/2018 at 3:33 PM, starcaptain said:
Whelp, I have to restart. Ignoring the fact that I crashed my smaller lander and that it was inadequately tested, I have WAYYYY too few science containers. Each one can carry 30 slots, but each biome is 10. (11 including atmosphere.) I thought they could carry unlimited experiments ;_;
Let's see:
- Each biome on surface: goo, sci-jr, gravity, temp, seismic, pressure, crew report, eva report, sample (9)
- Each biome on Laythe: same as above and atmosphere analysis (10)
- Each biome in flight: eva report (1)
- Each Laythe biome in flight: eva report, atmosphere analysis low, atmo" high (3)
- Each world in space low: goo, sci-jr, gravity, temp, pressure, crew report (6)
- Each world in space high: same as above (6)
- So each world requires 12 + b*(9+1) slots (where b=number of biomes)
- Except Laythe, which requires 12 + b*(10+3)
- Number of biomes:
- Pol: 4; needs 52 slots
- Bop: 5; needs 62 slots
- Tylo: 9; needs 102 slots
- Vall: 9; needs 102 slots
- Laythe: 10, needs 142 slots
- Jool: no biomes: 18 slots (high space, low space, in atmosphere; 24 if you include surface and are feeling particularly mad)
Return Vehicle Requires: 478 slots!!!
Requires 16 Science Boxes
I'll take my experiences in the attempt, and make a better mission.
Not to be deterred, not only will I run it better: I intend to get that eva report from Jool's atmosphere.
Awesome! Jeb's level was really lacking participants recently so I'm excited to see people going all out for science. I think you forgot the fact that Jool has a High and Low atmosphere. I've never seen anyone try to recover Jool low atmosphere science. Diving probes have been done, but transmitting science doesn't count for the score. There are a couple of other science cases, maybe read the wiki page on science for more...
The only limit on experiments I'm aware of is "no duplicate experiments in one container". The science lab doesn't have this limitation.
9 hours ago, Xephosas said:Some Questions:
1. Can I leave fule tanks on the way
2. Can I leave landers and Stuff at Jool
3. Can you leave the motherschip at a planet and opperate from there?
Yes, you can dump parts anywhere you want.
Many people leave the mothership in orbit of one moon, or in Jool orbit, and go from there. You could also land your mothership on a moon if you want, but getting back to it might be a hassle.
-
On 4/9/2018 at 3:32 PM, DAL59 said:
This is... actually happening. Huh.
I actually stopped trying after getting less than halfway to the Mun in 2 hours (real time) of ion burning. I then went back to my spreadsheet and tried to make it work with nukes, but I don't think the TWR and DeltaV can both work out.
Does somebody else with more time and experience with ion ships want to try?
-
On 3/29/2018 at 2:05 PM, starcaptain said:
I have an incredibly ambitious plan.
Not just science every moon, but carry out every experiment on every biome in every moon, and a data transmit from Jool. And I intend to do it all in one launch, just like the old challenge rules.
My problem however is making a Laythe biome hopper. Either I must make a mobile lab fly, or bring along 10 independently controlled and re-entry capable science packages. Either plan requires a plane.
So far I've built this thing, but I'm terrible at landing. It has a nasty tendency to flip over because whenever I input a 10 degree roll left, it whips back and responds 60 degrees right.
https://imgur.com/a/1VQjT
Do you guys have any advice? Or, if this isn't the right place to ask, where do I ask? I've been out of the loop for KSP for over a year; I was in school and had no time for games or forums.
All you need is to make a 2-crew plane with one science package including an experiment storage unit. Bring along a pilot and a scientist, who can reset the goo and materials, and store your results in the storage unit until you can bring them all back to the lab at the main ship. Maybe you missed the introduction of this part while you were away from KSP?
Your plane probably has too much wing dihedral (upwards angle) and your rudders could be moved to the wingtips, which would put them farther back from the CoM. Also check that each control surface is set to only one of pitch, yaw, or roll.
-
Okay, it's time to start putting actions behind my words. I whipped this plane together in about 15 minutes based on my spreadsheet. It weighs 68 tons at launch. On the first time I reached orbit, it weighed 47.223 tons once in orbit, for a 69.44% mass fraction! I haven't actually played KSP in quite a while and I forgot to use LF tanks or bigS wings instead of LFO. My flying skills could also use a tune-up, so I'm sure I can do better with this plane.
I think it might be worth it to switch to turbojets for higher thrust and efficiency and lower dry mass. The wolfhound was enough to take over without any closed cycle on the rapiers, so I think it can make up for slower airbreathing top speed.
Anyway here are some pictures.
-
19 hours ago, Lirtosiast said:
@sdj64 You're correct. There was a serious error in my spreadsheet; I really shouldn't be doing this late at night! Now I'm getting similar numbers. 3.1% payload fraction with nukes and slightly lower with the Wolfhound.
However I think a 70% payload fraction is far too high given that @AeroGav could barely manage 50%-- and that was with an optimal SSTO engine balance, which is different from an optimal Tylo landing engine balance. Assuming 52% to suborbit and zero structural/wing mass we still have a -2.4% payload fraction (-15 tons on a 100 ton dry mass craft), or slightly worse with your engine balance.
The difference is that he counted only the mass of the ore tanks detached in orbit, while I count the mass of the SSTO itself upon reaching orbit. His SSTO, by my quick estimate from looking at the video, has at least 42 tons dry weight so it would be a 72% payload fraction, even better than the optimistic number in my spreadsheet.
-
I think it is possible with the Wolfhound, if Making history is considered stock. I'm using slightly different values than you as well. In my spreadsheet the craft has a 66 ton starting mass and has 2 rapiers and one wolfhound. It would be a bit slow getting off of Kerbin, but possible with some drag tricks? There's even a luxury of 0.14 tons left over - enough to add a Kerbal in a command seat!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sP97xSETIcLN-ntugP5VPyi_Sh-9rwwwE9URabtZRqA/edit?usp=sharing
-
@IvanBatura Congratulations, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 3! Your liberal use of seats allowed you to have a very lightweight Level 3+2 solution - 5 Kerbals with 2 landing on each moon! I think the crew also appreciated the very warm cabins on the journey to Jool. I liked the pancake riding at the end too. I liked the gifs, but I would have enjoyed seeing some landings!
Thanks for an excellent entry. This thread is now closed to future entries, but you can find the new thread in the link below!
-
Thanks @JacobJHC! I haven't had the chance to check out Making History yet but this will be the first mission I have in mind when I look at the new parts and mission builder. But given the bug reports I've seen it's probably best to avoid turning challenges into missions at the moment.
I like the low parts idea too!
-
@McQuacker Congratulations, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 1! I was able to find enough pictures with Delta-V and other information to confirm that the different craft could all execute their landings and transfers. I liked the extra effort to bring along another crew member and collect science, and your Laythe lander was a unique hybrid of rocket and plane.
@kerolyov Good idea! I would probably do a tag like the ISRU and GRAND TOUR tags, but it's Jacob's decision now how to properly acknowledge the extra effort of using life support. I don't think it should be separate from the levels because life support would be much harder on Jeb's level, with 5 Kerbals, than it would be on Level 1. It has been done a couple of times before and I noted it in the short description for those entries.
-
4 hours ago, Pipcard said:
When ISRU is being used, does any resource scanner have to be sent along with the mission? Because I kind of want to roleplay a scanner being sent ahead of time to evaluate the situation before actually sending in the crew.
You can send your scanner before the mission. It's good planning, and, many people have done the Jool 5 on long-running saves and had already scanned Jool's moons on other missions.
On 2/18/2018 at 7:06 AM, GRS said:Well, hope 1.0.5 attempts are still capable to enter the leaderboards as so as 1.0 and beyond, i said this because i doubt my pc can handle ksp 1.3.0 which i got from a friend (that also plays ksp) and well, the mission seems to be going to be so hard (Difficulty : SUPREME/SUP3R) since many landings and advanced planning (0.1 TWR made it Difficulty : ULTRA)
IIRC some optimization was done in 1.2 so you might be able to run modern KSP better than your old version. But you are welcome to submit on any version 1.0+.
-
@JacobJHC has my permission to make the new Jool 5 Challenge thread when this one closes. Thank you for stepping up. I'm glad to have someone with experience with completing the Jool 5 Challenge twice, including one Level 3, and also experience running other challenges. For all of those who have a mission in progress, don't worry - you will probably still be able to submit in the new Jool 5 Challenge. If there is a change with the Making History expansion that makes it difficult or impossible to judge equally, I'll keep this one open for a while upon request.
@PhoenixRise86 I'm sorry, I can't see your original file names. I'll take another look, it seems like the second half of the album is roughly in reverse order so I should be able to follow it well enough.
-
@PhoenixRise86 Congratulations, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 1! I like your Falcon Heavy-style launch and your mission was above and beyond the minimum for level 1 with 3 crew and science. It's rare to see a Jool 5 without nuclear engines but yours was efficiently done with just Terriers for your transfer stage.
@foobar Congratulations, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 1! And you are now the low-mass and low-cost record holder for 1.2-1.3! You had a great low-mass entry with an efficient spaceplane. Controlling that Tylo lander must have been a great feat of piloting! How did you get off the ground with the tipped-over lander, without a reaction wheel?
@McQuacker Looks like a great mission, but can you put your pictures in order? It's hard to follow such a large album out of order!
Thanks for your patience, everyone. As you can probably tell I've been getting slower to reply over the past couple of months. Since I started a new job and moved to live on my own, I have much less time for KSP and I think that it would be best for someone with more time to take over the Jool 5 Challenge. I'm officially closing for new entries on the release day of the Making History expansion (March 13). With all of the new features I think the Jool 5 will need some significant updates, and could even have a mission from the mission builder! Thanks everyone for the continued support and ongoing entries to the challenge. You all have pushed the boundaries and delivered with creativity and quality.
If you are interested in taking over or contributing in the future, please let me know.
And also, this adds to the difficulty. But once in Jool's SOI, you can use seats for landers to the moons.
The Ultimate Jool 5 Challenge Continued
in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
Posted
Okay I'm not dead but I've only made it to Laythe so far. At this rate, I'll be done by April! (joking of course, but it will definitely be after Christmas)
I had to give the ship some nukes for the Tylo transfers and a redesigned tail for better aero stability, compared to the previous picture I posted.
Here are some pictures: https://imgur.com/a/fBd4Wp8